164 réponses à ce sujet

[PlayHero]

I'd like to start off by saying I don't understand why many of the decisions made during the design phase of this game were made. There may be completely legitimate reasons, or perhaps just an artistic vision, but none of this is reflected in the final product.

As a Bioware and Dragon Age fan, I'm sickened by the ending of this game. I was never expecting to have all my decisions made completely irrelevant, which is something that goes so completely against what Dragon Age is about. Without spoiling anything, I supported the Mages the entirety of the game. Yet, when the end comes, I'm forced to support the Templars without explination. At that point my decisions are hastily made for me with nonsensical consequences quickly following. Again, this is the last thing I'd expect from Bioware.

Additionally, I'm sorely disappointed by the design decisions made concerning dialogue. Potential responses are shoehorned into five, or so, extremely vague dialogue archetypes which are further shoehorned into every conversation. I was forced to consistently choose the nice or just option, for fear of selecting one that seemed more akin to what message I wanted to convey but resulted in one completely different. The option selected and words spoken never matched completely, which isn't a problem, but, too often, they differed extremely. It was never clear exactly to whom the message would be conveyed and specifically how. Selecting the fist or gavel dialogue option would surely cause me to lash out at somebody, but it's never certain to whom. Was the jester's mask ever necessary? Was a witty or joking response required in every single conversation? All the conversation icons may have well been question marks or curtains, because I could never be certain what lay behind them. There were times where selecting the fight option ended in people I wanted to protect being killed without a fight actually being fought.

Other than the above, the game's stability is worrying. Long, drawn out fights often ended with a crash, requiring me to start again. Despite that, the game had a lot of potential and any other issue I had with it was minor. These two issues ruined the game, by creating an environment where the choices I was making were completely unclear and, ultimately, every one of them was completely disregarded.

Thanks for reading; I just wanted to get that off my chest. Flame on.

Modifié par PlayHero, 13 avril 2011 - 12:24 .

[Slugwood]

Forced to support the Templars? Are you referring to Meredith's quest-giving type stuff?

[antenni88]

Well atleast I supported the mages and I even had Fenris on my side.

[Vicious]

I was never expecting to have all my decisions made completely irrelevant, which is something that goes so completely against what Dragon Age is about.

Hate to break it to you, but everything you had control over in DA:O was completely irrelevant too. You remember the biggest decision in the game? The godbaby? His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.


So it doesn't go against DA:O. You are just under the false impression that your decisions matter. They don't. They never did.

The only events that 'matter' are the ones you have NO control over as they are part of the plot. The Archdemon dead, and the war that DA2 ends in. Those are the events that 'matter.'

And yeah, it sucks, but luckily I realized this back when DA:O came out and DA2 confirmed it, so I just enjoy it for what it is.

[jds1bio]

Vicious wrote...

Hate to break it to you, but everything you had control over in DA:O was completely irrelevant too. You remember the biggest decision in the game? The godbaby? His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.

So it doesn't go against DA:O. You are just under the false impression that your decisions matter. They don't. They never did.

The only events that 'matter' are the ones you have NO control over as they are part of the plot. The Archdemon dead, and the war that DA2 ends in. Those are the events that 'matter.'

And yeah, it sucks, but luckily I realized this back when DA:O came out and DA2 confirmed it, so I just enjoy it for what it is.

At least in DA:O you had some input into the actual "final blow" to the archdemon and who was affected by it.  That was something that differentiated the ending.  I know, it's only one thing, but I agree with you otherwise.

In DA2 it seems like the main story is set in stone, and the extremist characters and their actions were crafted to keep you basically on a one-track trip through the main story.

You know, I have a question: when creating this kind of game, is the story laid out and set in stone first?  Or, are certain story ideas presented as scenarios and then playtested via human role-playing sessions with a real-life DM?

Because, if they were role-play-tested first, they might come up with the sets of options and ingenuities that would be most intriguing to gamers, and then they could develop those alongside the story, and make sure the topology of quests and story would be satisfactory to gamers, developers, and writers all at the same time.

Does this idea make sense to anyone?

Modifié par jds1bio, 13 avril 2011 - 01:31 .

[TJSolo]

Hate to break it to you, but everything you had control over in DA:O was completely irrelevant too. You remember the biggest decision in the game? The godbaby? His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.

The choices in DAO were a lot more relevant to the story than the choices in in DA2, if a comparison must be made try to either oversimplify each games outcomes equally or not at all.

[petipas1414]

I agree with the bit on dialogue.

I think it says a lot that this piece was so rushed they couldn't even rip off something correctly.

[erynnar]

TJSolo wrote...

Hate to break it to you, but everything you had control over in DA:O was completely irrelevant too. You remember the biggest decision in the game? The godbaby? His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.

The choices in DAO were a lot more relevant to the story than the choices in in DA2, if a comparison must be made try to either oversimplify each games outcomes equally or not at all.

And a lot of the choices in DAO got made irrelevant by DA2 itself, because apparently they hated DAO so much they decided to kick out most of the lore, and the choices people may have made (like a certain DAO character coming back after you may have killed them, two actually), and pretended like that other game never happened.

[Cutlass Jack]

erynnar wrote...

And a lot of the choices in DAO got made irrelevant by DA2 itself, because apparently they hated DAO so much they decided to kick out most of the lore, and the choices people may have made (like a certain DAO character coming back after you may have killed them, two actually), and pretended like that other game never happened.

Pfft. That ship already sailed by Awakening really. That expansion made all my choices feel completely irrelevant.

[Morroian]

Are we going to get the same old arguments rehashed every time someone new finishes the game?

PlayHero wrote...

As a Bioware and Dragon Age fan, I'm sickened by the ending of this game. I was never expecting to have all my decisions made completely irrelevant, which is something that goes so completely against what Dragon Age is about. Without spoiling anything, I supported the Mages the entirety of the game. Yet, when the end comes, I'm forced to support the Templars without explination. At that point my decisions are hastily made for me with nonsensical consequences quickly following. Again, this is the last thing I'd expect from Bioware.

Dunno what game you played but I supported the mages. 

PlayHero wrote...

Additionally, I'm sorely disappointed by the design decisions made concerning dialogue. Potential responses are shoehorned into five, or so, extremely vague dialogue archetypes which are further shoehorned into every conversation. I was forced to consistently choose the nice or just option, for fear of selecting one that seemed more akin to what message I wanted to convey but resulted in one completely different. 

You see those icons in the centre of the wheel, they indicated the tone of each response. So you get an idea of what you are saying and the tone. I dunno what there is to be afraid of.

PlayHero wrote...

The option selected and words spoken never matched completely, which isn't a problem, but, too often, they differed extremely. It was never clear exactly to whom the message would be conveyed and specifically how. Selecting the fist or gavel dialogue option would surely cause me to lash out at somebody, but it's never certain to whom. Was the jester's mask ever necessary? Was a witty or joking response required in every single conversation? 

Yes, the game gives Hawke a default character based on the types of options you choose. The responses from Hawke where there is no option to choose are driven by this default characterisation you choose. And yes if you move from mainly witty responses to mainly angry responses the default characterisation will eventually change.

PlayHero wrote...

Other than the above, the game's stability is worrying. Long, drawn out fights often ended with a crash, requiring me to start again. Despite that, the game had a lot of potential and any other issue I had with it was minor. 

Well I've had less stability problems on PC than I had with DAO.

[Morroian]

erynnar wrote...

And a lot of the choices in DAO got made irrelevant by DA2 itself, because apparently they hated DAO so much they decided to kick out most of the lore, 

Exaggerate much.

[TJSolo]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

erynnar wrote...

And a lot of the choices in DAO got made irrelevant by DA2 itself, because apparently they hated DAO so much they decided to kick out most of the lore, and the choices people may have made (like a certain DAO character coming back after you may have killed them, two actually), and pretended like that other game never happened.

Pfft. That ship already sailed by Awakening really. That expansion made all my choices feel completely irrelevant.

and yet all this displacement does not make how consequences in DA2 were handled any better.

[Cutlass Jack]

TJSolo wrote...

and yet all this displacement does not make how consequences in DA2 were handled any better.

You're trying too hard. The point was actually that they weren't handled any worse.

[PlayHero]

Vicious wrote...

I was
never expecting to have all my decisions made completely irrelevant,
which is something that goes so completely against what Dragon Age is
about.

Hate to break it to you, but everything
you had control over in DA:O was completely irrelevant too. You remember
the biggest decision in the game? The godbaby? His existence is a non
issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the
effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.


So it doesn't go against DA:O. You are just under the false impression that your decisions matter. They don't. They never did.

The
only events that 'matter' are the ones you have NO control over as they
are part of the plot. The Archdemon dead, and the war that DA2 ends in.
Those are the events that 'matter.'

And yeah, it sucks, but
luckily I realized this back when DA:O came out and DA2 confirmed it, so
I just enjoy it for what it is.

I disagree. Many of the available decisions had a significant impact on gameplay. Hell, which origin story you chose set the mood for the entire game. That's huge. Some of the most pognient decisions, for me, was keeping Sten in check. He was definitely difficult to deal with, but worth keeping in check.

Morroian wrote...

Are we going to get the same old arguments rehashed every time someone new finishes the game?

PlayHero wrote...

As a Bioware and Dragon Age fan, I'm sickened by the ending of this game. I was never expecting to have all my decisions made completely irrelevant, which is something that goes so completely against what Dragon Age is about. Without spoiling anything, I supported the Mages the entirety of the game. Yet, when the end comes, I'm forced to support the Templars without explination. At that point my decisions are hastily made for me with nonsensical consequences quickly following. Again, this is the last thing I'd expect from Bioware.

Dunno what game you played but I supported the mages. 

PlayHero wrote...

Additionally, I'm sorely disappointed by the design decisions made concerning dialogue. Potential responses are shoehorned into five, or so, extremely vague dialogue archetypes which are further shoehorned into every conversation. I was forced to consistently choose the nice or just option, for fear of selecting one that seemed more akin to what message I wanted to convey but resulted in one completely different. 

You see those icons in the centre of the wheel, they indicated the tone of each response. So you get an idea of what you are saying and the tone. I dunno what there is to be afraid of.

PlayHero wrote...

The option selected and words spoken never matched completely, which isn't a problem, but, too often, they differed extremely. It was never clear exactly to whom the message would be conveyed and specifically how. Selecting the fist or gavel dialogue option would surely cause me to lash out at somebody, but it's never certain to whom. Was the jester's mask ever necessary? Was a witty or joking response required in every single conversation? 

Yes, the game gives Hawke a default character based on the types of options you choose. The responses from Hawke where there is no option to choose are driven by this default characterisation you choose. And yes if you move from mainly witty responses to mainly angry responses the default characterisation will eventually change.

PlayHero wrote...

Other than the above, the game's stability is worrying. Long, drawn out fights often ended with a crash, requiring me to start again. Despite that, the game had a lot of potential and any other issue I had with it was minor. 

Well I've had less stability problems on PC than I had with DAO.

Clearly, you didn't read my post thoroughly. I supported the mages as well, but was forced to not only kill them, but the templars attempting to sympathize with them. How is that for supporting the mages?

The conversation icons, as detailed in the intruction booklet, rarely lead to an appropriately relevant response. That, in combination with the never-correct text selections, made it extremely difficult to play the game with precise intent.

Modifié par PlayHero, 13 avril 2011 - 02:37 .

[Morroian]

PlayHero wrote...

Clearly, you didn't read my post thoroughly. I supported the mages as well, but was forced to not only kill them, but the templars attempting to sympathize with them. How is that for supporting the mages?

Which mages? In the final battle I killed mages who turned abomination but thats all. If you're talking about the quest Best Served Cold with Grace you can convince Thrask and Alain that you aren't working with Meredith and only kill Grace and her thralls. Grace kills Thrask but thats on her not HAwke.

PlayHero wrote...

The conversation icons, as detailed in the intruction booklet, rarely lead to an appropriately relevant response. That, in combination with the never-correct text selections, made it extremely difficult to play the game with precise intent.

I don't think relevance is quite correct. The tonal icons convey the tone whether its aggressive, diplomatic, witty, etc. As far as I could see in all cases the response was just that. 

[McAdams]

DA2 gives the player the illusion of choice. Bioware said early on they are telling a story, it is for the player to play out that story, not rewrite it. How the Player gets to the plot points/ending of the story may differ, but the outcome is where Bioware intended the Player to be.

As for the conversation wheel, I think of it as a guessing game. If my guess is right, that's good. If the outcome is bad, I reload an earlier save and pick a different option.

[Sen4lifE]

Vicious wrote...

I was never expecting to have all my decisions made completely irrelevant, which is something that goes so completely against what Dragon Age is about.

Hate to break it to you, but everything you had control over in DA:O was completely irrelevant too. You remember the biggest decision in the game? The godbaby? His existence is a non issue. Even the DA:O DLC managed to trash it when Morrigan said to the effect of 'oh i really didn't need it anyway' in Witch Hunt.


So it doesn't go against DA:O. You are just under the false impression that your decisions matter. They don't. They never did.

The only events that 'matter' are the ones you have NO control over as they are part of the plot. The Archdemon dead, and the war that DA2 ends in. Those are the events that 'matter.'

And yeah, it sucks, but luckily I realized this back when DA:O came out and DA2 confirmed it, so I just enjoy it for what it is.

She said that?  You mean the same time she said she put the baby in a safe place and had to go into an entirely different dimension to prepare it and for what is to come and took the Warden with her?  'Kay, just making sure you were failing on what I thought you were.

[TJSolo]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

and yet all this displacement does not make how consequences in DA2 were handled any better.

You're trying too hard. The point was actually that they weren't handled any worse.

Where was that point made?  The OP gave reasons why he did thinks the end in DA2 was horrible, your reply....Awakenings made all of your choice in Origins irrelevant. There was no point other than avoiding the issue the OP has. Plus it is odd since the OP means consequences that happen within DA2 not choices spanning across expansions and sequels.

Modifié par TJSolo, 13 avril 2011 - 03:05 .

[Cutlass Jack]

TJSolo wrote...

Where was that point made?  The OP gave reasons why he did thinks the end in DA2 was horrible, your reply....Awakenings made all of your choice in Origins irrelevant. There was no point other than avoiding the issue the OP has.

Try just scrolling up the thread and rereading. Its not hard, really. You responded to the posts where the point was made. The OP felt that all his choices in DA2 seemed irrelevant. Another poster replied (fairly I think) that Origins choices were equally irrelevant.

However my response was to the person who said DA2 was what ruined the Origin choices. I wasn't responding to the OP. I just pointed out that many of those choices were already ruined by Awakening, so a little unfair to place the blame on DA2. To which you jumped to the poor conclusion that I was really saying somehow that DA2 was better.

Regardless, no one was avoiding the issue the OP has. Just pointing out that its not a new issue.

I didn't address his issues on the Dialogue system mainly because I completely disagree with his assessment. But I can appreciate that its his opinion and he's not the first person who seems to be confounded by it.

[jds1bio]

McAdams wrote...

DA2 gives the player the illusion of choice. Bioware said early on they are telling a story, it is for the player to play out that story, not rewrite it. How the Player gets to the plot points/ending of the story may differ, but the outcome is where Bioware intended the Player to be.

As for the conversation wheel, I think of it as a guessing game. If my guess is right, that's good. If the outcome is bad, I reload an earlier save and pick a different option.

The convo wheel totally worked for me, but as far as the main story goes, the illusion of choice isn't an illusion to me in this game.

(copied from another post)

I'll try to create a detailed example (this scenario is totally made up though so not a spoiler):

Imagine
if a character did what he/she did in the Deep Roads because you used the mean or sarcastic dialogue options a few too many times with the character, and he/she decided that you weren't worth being taken seriously.  If that's revealed to you late in the game, that might be a cool revelation, and you might feel responsible for your Hawke's choice of words depending on the consequences.

Now imagine playing through a 2nd time, this time using mostly nice or helpful dialogue with this character.  And then seeing that they do the exact same thing in the Deep Roads, but receiving a different explanation late in the game than in the first playthrough.  This still could be a cool revelation, if the different explanation makes sense to the characters and the story.  This is what games like The Witcher have done when it comes to choice and consequence in the main story.  It's an effective illusion that doesn't change the main events, but might make you think or feel differently about them.

Now imagine that second playthrough using those nice/helpful dialogue options, but then instead of getting a
different explanation late in the game, you get the same explanation as the one you received in the very first playthrough.  In this case, you realize that your choice of dialogue doesn't matter because the actions taken by the character, and the explanations of those actions, don't ever change.  This might be ok if it happens once or twice in the main story, but this is what DA2 does with too many of its main-story events.

I hope I explained this ok.

Modifié par jds1bio, 13 avril 2011 - 03:23 .

[FiachSidhe]

At least at the end of DA:O, you got a nice little epilogue of your influence. Even if they did **** all over it with Awakenings, and then forgot all about it in DA2.

With DA2, it seems EA has taken notice and decided to make it a cash cow at this point. Starting day DLC, bug testing handled by Helen Keller, and an ending that screams "Coming soon...The Ending of Dragon Age 2 $9.99".

I'm worried about how badly these sell outs are going to rape Star Wars.

[Raphael diSanto]

The point that people are missing is that DA2 is NOT Hawke's story. Sorry, folks, but you are NOT the main character in this story. It's not DAO. It's not about Hawke saving the city, or finding the "good" ending.

DA2 is the story of the City of Kirkwall, the story of the events leading up to the .. well, no spoilers, but the stuff that the Seeker is asking Varric about. It's about Hawke's role in those events, sure. But it's not Hawke's story. It's not an epic "save-the-country/world/universe" story.

It's the story of "what happened in Kirkwall over 10 years to cause the situation we now find ourselves in."

I, personally, absolutely love this story. It's the closest I've ever felt to real roleplaying in a cRPG. Walking the fine line between the factions, helping where I felt it right to help, not where I didn't. It felt much more meaningful than "Here's Darkspawn, go kill them. Oh, look, an archdemon. Go kill that, too."

Modifié par Raphael diSanto, 13 avril 2011 - 03:38 .

[jds1bio]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

The point that people are missing is that DA2 is NOT Hawke's story. Sorry, folks, but you are NOT the main character in this story. It's not DAO. It's not about Hawke saving the city, or finding the "good" ending.

But it was marketed to us as Hawke's Rise To Power, not Chronicles of Kirkwall.  So if you're right about DA2 not being Hawke's story, then you can understand why some feel like they've been had.

[Morroian]

FiachSidhe wrote...

At least at the end of DA:O, you got a nice little epilogue of your influence. Even if they did **** all over it with Awakenings, and then forgot all about it in DA2.

With DA2, it seems EA has taken notice and decided to make it a cash cow at this point. Starting day DLC, bug testing handled by Helen Keller, and an ending that screams "Coming soon...The Ending of Dragon Age 2 $9.99".

So the lack of epilogue slides means Bioware have sold out 

[juweee]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

The point that people are missing is that DA2 is NOT Hawke's story. Sorry, folks, but you are NOT the main character in this story. It's not DAO. It's not about Hawke saving the city, or finding the "good" ending.

DA2 is the story of the City of Kirkwall, the story of the events leading up to the .. well, no spoilers, but the stuff that the Seeker is asking Varric about. It's about Hawke's role in those events, sure. But it's not Hawke's story. It's not an epic "save-the-country/world/universe" story.

It's the story of "what happened in Kirkwall over 10 years to cause the situation we now find ourselves in."

Bravo.

Definitely agree, it's not about Hawke at all. It's the story of Anders' fall from grace, and the aftermath thereof. Hawke just happened to be there for it.

Modifié par juweee, 13 avril 2011 - 04:10 .